Version 0.1.1

The following text is a copy of my tumblr blog post ranting about why I decided to make this. I want that blog post to be the devlog for the first version released

Stumbled upon a couple of manifestos for RPG rule-system design and thought i'd give it a try hacking and homebrewing.

What really got me was the modular thinking it involves in both manifestos (Outcstretching in the FRESCO acronym). I really liked the idea of creating my own game simply by adding together rules like they're Legos or Mario Maker assets.

I kept reading both manifestos and thought that FRESCO Flexible improved a lot of MOSAIC Strict rules, but also that the rest of the rules were non-contrarian between Manifestos.

Theoretically, you could make a FRESCO Flexible ruleset that is also MOSAIC Strict.

And since no manifesto bans me (i think) from inspiration on other CC BY licensed toolkits i came up with one that hacks Caltrop Core and Diedream systems into a minimalist contradiction-inducing dice-based oracle.

I drafted a write-up as an experiment but it contains sections that make me unsure about them aligning to MOSAIC Strict. I want to discuss this briefly as a testament to my ideas on these concepts when drafting the rules.

Is using parts of other systems under CC BY licenses considered referencing other games? Does it break the Independent rule?

I based most of the text on the Caltrop Core SRD by TitanomachyRPG with influence from other resolution systems. The rules are literally a hack of different systems that I´ve been using for my own RPG playthrough and wanted to share as a module. I haven´t added any new systems; I´ve just hacked existing ones together. I claim no direct authorship of any part of this system, my authorship comprises only of putting them together.

Now, I had the question if this broke the Independent rule MOSAIC Strict enforces by which you are forbidden to reference other game texts. Here I want to argue that in my interpenetration of the restrictions hacking other systems in fact does not break the no-reference rule.

It is an established philosophical fact that new knowledge is always based on previous knowledge; this basically entails that it is impossible to come up with an entirely new and unique idea/rule. Even the MOSAIC Strict ruleset has built on previous ideas and knowledge even if the author is not explicit or even aware of it. Even any text (like mine) written to be in accordance with the Attested/Registered rule would be a reference to another document as inspiration. Because of this, inspiration from other systems cannot be disqualifying.

As an addendum to the previous point and to be totally clear about my text I say this: The restrictions in MOSAIC Strict do not explicitly forbid me from including attribution texts required by the CC-BY license. This means that any MOSAIC Strict must also accommodate attribution properly.

How i interpret the rules all this is about the system being independent from other factors in a concrete game. I think this because the text makes so much enphasis on not referencing a concrete game´s quantified state; no dexterity points or hp from concrete playing characters.

I was almost about to break this rule when I realized what it really meant. In the first draft of the text, the number of dice rolled depended explicitly on character stats, which counts as quantified state. I changed the text to instead leave the decision of how many dice to roll up to the player. My new rule doesn´t reference stats but just asks the player to choose the number of dice "as appropriate for the difficulty of the play." With this wording, i not only stopped referencing game state but also stopped referencing a narrative gameplay at all (not making assumptions is part of the MOSAIC rules). You can use my resolution system on RPGS or on any other game.

These are all my arguments on why my text passes both MOSAIC Strict and FRESCO Flexible.

Rant is over. Peace!